Celestine+v.+Lafayette+Parish+School+Board

Jessica Oliver Allen Celestine v. Lafayette Parish School Board Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit November 5, 1973 Background: The case of //Celestine v. Lafayette Parish School Board// dealt with the incompetent decisions of a fifth grade teacher. Allen Celestine, the plaintiff, was a teacher at N.P. Moss Elementary School until he was dismissed for the poor judgment he administered on two fifth grade students. The students were caught using profanity; therefore Mr. Celestine told them to write the vulgar word they spoke 1,000 times. This punishment was carried out the entire school day with the two students working on the assignment in front of other students. The plaintiff’s suit was a claim that he was not incompetent in his punishment and that he was denied due process of law. The teacher also proceeded to claim he has a right to academic freedom as a public school teacher and pointed out that other teachers use similar methods of punishment.

Decision and Rationale: The school board provided the plaintiff with a public hearing in which they unanimously voted to dismiss the teacher. The court proceeded to explain that it is not their duty to overturn the decision of the school board. This is based on cases such as //Chantlin v. Acadia Parish School Board// which says “when there is a rational basis for an administrative board’s discretionary determinations which are supported by substantial evidence insofar as factually required., the Court has no right to substitute its judgment for the administrative board’s or to interfere with the latter’s bona fide exercise of its discretion.” The Court decided that although teachers do have a right to academic freedom, this does not entitle a teacher to use or expose young students to vulgar words. This form of punishment, as the court pointed out, did not provide any academic or educational purpose. The appeal was denied.

Impact on Teaching: This case supports the decisions made by school boards. The boards are put in place to handle such situations as they arise in school systems. Their decisions will not be overturned unless unreasonable situations are evident. Also, this case reminds teachers that each decision they make should be well thought out and follow reasonable guidelines for the classroom. Teachers cannot punish a student in any way that is harmful to the student or their peers. Question: T or F: The appeals court often overturns the decisions of the school board, even when the school board’s judgment is rational.

Michael Mooney

Celestine v. Lafayette Parish School Board, 284 So. 2d 650 - La: Court of Appeals, 3rd Circuit 1973
An elementary public school teacher, Allen Celestine, was made aware of a few girls using vulgar language during recess. When confronted, the girls admitted to using bad language and as a punishment, the teacher made the girls write the word 1000 times on a piece of paper. The word in question was F—K. This was completed during the school day and in full view of the other students in the classroom, some of which had knowledge of what the girls were writing. When one of the girls finished, Mr. Celestine sent her to the principal, Robert Landry, with her paper to have him sign it and to be made aware of what happened. The next day, the teacher was suspended without pay for using poor judgment in the punishment of the girls. Mr. Celestine appealed the School Board decision and wishes to be reinstated with full back pay and benefits. The appeals court affirmed the decision and sided with the school board and their choice to remove the teacher from the classroom. The courts never swayed in the thought on the matter. They were unanimous in their decision and cited several Supreme Court cases to support their decision. The court used Rathe v. Jefferson Parish School Board, 206 La. 317, 19 So.2d 153 (1943) which stated, “There is nothing more firmly established in law than the principle that, within the limits of their authority, the power and discretion of legally created governing boards is supreme.” The extended quote from the case ends with, “It is only when it is clearly shown that the action of such a board is beyond its authority or is arbitrary, unreasonable, or fraudulent that a court is justified in interfering.” Mr. Celestine tried to rely on Keefe v. Geanakos, 418 F.2d 359 (1 Cir. 1969) to win his argument. That case also dealt with the use of vulgar language in the school. However, the courts used the same case to refute his findings. “. . . Furthermore, as in all other instances, the offensiveness of language and the particular propriety or impropriety is dependent on the circumstances of the utterance.” The court saw no reason to think the school board acted in an irrational manner when coming to their decision to fire Mr. Celestine. I have a difficult time finding an impact on teaching from this case. This is a common sense blunder at its best. There should be no need of a case like this to inspire teachers, administration, or school systems, to use better judgment when disciplining the students under their care. The only impact I can see applying to this matter is that the profession of teaching, as a whole, will say “I cannot believe that guy did that.” **Question:** Does the School Board have full autonomy in making decisions if they are arrived at in a logical and ethical process?
 * Background:**
 * Decision and Rationale:**
 * Impact on Teaching:**

** Court Case Review #7 ** Allen CELESTINE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LAFAYETTE PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant-Appellee ** Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. ** November 5, 1973.

 **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Background: ** <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">The teacher in fifth grade class in Louisiana assigned two female students’ as a punishment to write the vulgar word a thousand times as in class assignment, and <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">have them signed by the school principal and the student parents. The one of students’ followed the teacher instruction and completed the assignment, took it to be signed by the <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">principal. On the following day the principal and the school board met with plaintiff about the incident. The board decision to suspend the teacher from his duty <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">without pay effect that afternoon. <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">“According to the case filed in the instant suit, we agree with the School Board and the trial court that plaintiff did not have the right, under the principle of academic freedom or any other <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">theory, to require an eleven year old girl to write the very vulgar word which was involved here even once, when no valid purpose conceivably could be served by the use of that word. He <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">certainly had no right to require her to write such a word many times in the presence of her classmates. His very poor judgment in imposing such a requirement is sufficient to support the <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">action of the School Board in dismissing him.” <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt 1.5in; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify; text-indent: -1.5in;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify;">**<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Decision and Rationale: ** The school board acting in the best interest of the student. The teacher made a bad judgment that could have harmed student. The teacher created in assignment that would not have any type of education bases. The teacher impact reached beyond the two students. The court rule against teacher and he remains out of the classroom. He relies on [|Keefe v. Geanakos, 418 F.2d 359 (1 Cir. 1969),] which involved the use of a much less offensive word in teaching high school students. The court held, in effect, that the use of the word involved there, under those circumstances, would not justify dismissal of the teacher. The court also stated, however, that: <span style="background: white; font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 5pt;">"We of course agree with defendants that what is to be said or read to students is not to be determined by obscenity standards for adult consumption. . . . Furthermore, as in all other instances, the offensiveness of language and the particular propriety or impropriety is dependent on the circumstances of the utterance."We accept the conclusion of the court below that `some measure of public regulation of classroom speech is inherent in every provision of public education.'" <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify;"> <span style="display: block; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 0pt; tab-stops: 51.75pt; text-align: justify;"> **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">Impact on Teaching **<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%;">: The impact reduces the freedoms’ a teacher has in the class. Good teachers always need to have good judgment in all decision that effect students. ** Quiz Question: ** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; margin: 0in 0in 10pt;">Should all assignments be review by the school board before teacher presents them to a class? Explain why or why not Submitted By Carrie Gossett **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">(David Boeck) ** <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">284 So.2d 650 (1973) **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-outline-level: 3; text-align: center;"> **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 13.5pt;">Allen CELESTINE, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LAFAYETTE PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant-Appellee. **   <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">No. 4242.  <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; text-align: center;"> **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit. **<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">November 5, 1973. <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">651*651 Murphy Bell, Baton Rouge, for plaintiff-appellant. <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Ronald Dauterive, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lafayette, for defendant-appellee. <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Before HOOD, CULPEPPER and MILLER, JJ. <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Background: <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> A teacher, Allen Celestine made a serious mistake in the way he handled the administration of punishment involving two of his students. The two students were observed using profane language on the playground at recess. Mr. Celestine then decided that he would punish the student’s misdeed by having them to write the profane word one-thousand times. The students attempted to complete the work throughout the school day, in front of other students exposing them all to profanity as a result. The school board found him incompetent due to his method of punishment and he was suspended. His suit is a result of those claims(incompetence). <span style="background: white; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0in 10pt; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto; mso-margin-top-alt: auto;"><span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Decision and rationale: <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> The courts found that the school board did not exceed its authority in this matter and further found that the courts did not in fact have the authority to overturn the school boards determination of a teacher’s incompetency. The courts found:” When there is a rational basis for an administrative board's discretionary determinations which are supported by substantial evidence insofar as factually required, the Court has no right to substitute its judgment for the administrative boards or to interfere with the latter's bona fide exercise of its discretion. [|Chantlin v. Acadia Parish School Board, 100 So.2d 908 (La.App. 1 Cir. 1958)]; [|Lewing v. DeSoto Parish School Board, 238 La. 43, 113 So.2d 462 (1959)]; [|State ex rel. Rathe v. Jefferson Parish School Board, 206 La. 317, 19 So.2d 153 (1943)]; [|Frank v. St. Landry Parish School Board, 225 So.2d 62 (La. App. 3 Cir. 1969)]; [|Granderson v. Orleans Parish School Board, 216 So.2d 643 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1968)]. End quote” <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Teaching implications: <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;"> The decisions that are made by teacher’s are always subject to scrutiny and the decisions of a few bad apples can have an effect on all. This teacher’s administration of punishment was completely absurd and it makes it difficult for others trying to do the right thing. The students of this school will question teachers punishments because of this one instance and it will take a long time for this to be forgotten, now that the court system has been involved. <span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 10pt;">Question: The court system overrule the school boards administrative decisions? True/False